U. S. Department of commerce

With our --- we use the interferometric system for the bulk of the survey here. In areas that were too shallow, we either used a terrestrial laser scanner, a LiDAR instrument on the bottom here, at low negative tides so that we could get a lot of the very shallow areas, or we used a single beam echo sounder hooked to an RTK GPS system to do some of the flanks of the system.

And this is the sum of that survey. This project is just coming in to an end now, and we're going to be reporting that data and providing it to NOAA if the levels of accuracy and documentation are up to their standards.

We certainly have been able to see both fine scale features, here's one of these deep holes that you get near confluences of channels, and there's also some very large features associated with confluence of channels.

You can see these little green dots on this map down here. These are pinnacles that are 20 feet tall in a much deeper channel that's between 45 and 60 feet deep. So there's a lot of detail, a lot of features on the bottom that we didn't know about in a lot of the waterways in Georgia.

We've also been collecting sediment sampling and trying to work on developing methods for developing a textural map. I know that NOAA is interested in characterizing what the bottom is like.

We're trying to take the data that we get from our discreet sampling and use sidescan sonar imagery that is collected by the system as well, and use the intensity backscatter patterns to create grain size maps can be used to provide a more widespread knowledge of what the bottom is like.

And we're working with our DNR, our fisheries division in Georgia to put this data in formats that can be helpful to them to better interpret their kinds of surveys that they do annually in the sounds.

The next up for us, we've been funded through our CZM program to move down the coast to the next sound down, the Ossabaw Sound. And so that will be the next sound that we start working in.

The Wassaw project was projected to be a one year project. We thought we'd go out, we'd map that thing, and we'd be done. It ended up taking us two years because there is a lot of issues associated with pitch and roll of smaller vessels when you're trying to survey, and that's something that I would like to talk about in the breakout groups in terms of perhaps sharing expertise or equipment that will give us better capacity.

For Ossabaw Sound, we've already proposed that as a two year project because we know there's a large part of the year when we just can't operate given the motion reference unit that we have with the system.

As I've mentioned, we've done some surveying in the rivers. This is the St. Mary's River on the Florida/Georgia border. The hotter colors are shallow areas -- the purply colors are deeper areas.

And so these are the kinds of data that we're producing from the rivers. And we've been working already with Kyle here in the navigation branch to start looking and comparing older data with this newer data that we're collecting.

There was a request from, I guess, City of St. Mary's for NOAA to go out and survey the river. And since we had just done it, you know, here's an opportunity where we can share data that's collected with updated systems, and we can share it with NOAA and let them better leverage and use their resources in other areas as long as they can document that the data that we're producing is up to the standards that are acceptable.

So these are the kinds of collaborative mapping efforts that I would hope that we would be able to expand on in the future.

There are other kinds of mapping that we've been doing around in Georgia. Skidaway Institute, my institute is located here on Skidaway Island. City of Savannah is up in the southwest here, and there's a small marsh here that we've been working on as part of a pilot area working with DOE. Why we're doing that, I can talk to people about.

But we've mapped that area using our -- that's interesting. Can you do something about that? I don't think I'm going to try to explain this figure, let's just move on.

Yes, so this is much more in my wheelhouse. So we've mapped this salt marsh at very high resolution to develop a DEM that can be used with circulation models to start studying the flow of water and nutrients and contaminants throughout marshes to develop better models.

But we've mapped with various different methods using our interferometric system for the deeper channels. We have very small boats with RTKs and high resolution echo sounders in the smaller channels, and then used pedestrian surveys for the upper part, and then used LiDAR on the upland to get that interface.

So there are these kinds of mapping efforts that can go on, and which can characterize banks and the channel edges along the Intracoastal if that sort of work was of interest.

A few years ago now, I think this was in 2011 that we did this work, we actually went out and mapped erosion rates of the Intracoastal Waterway and documented, and the Intracoastal is shown there in purple through Georgia.

The two areas that are the worst in Georgia, in case anybody cares, Hells Gate up here, and right behind Jekyll Island right there, those are the two areas that really need to be dredged every year if you want to enhance recreational boating.

But we've been looking at the Intracoastal Waterway from trying to develop data that's useful for managers. So we went out and mapped historic shore lines and calculated erosion rates and accretion rates on the Intracoastal Waterway.

This figure on the right is showing a high resolution classification of the undercoastal waterway. We have georeferenced video imagery of the Intracoastal Waterway throughout Georgia, and we're extending this work into the rivers this year.

But we've mapped in detail the character of the Intracoastal Waterway, whether it's marsh, whether it's armored, whether it's oyster beds so that managers can have a better idea. And of course, this will be very useful for recovery if we were to ever experience a large storm.

We also were interested in, well that's interesting, everywhere there's not a blue dot along that shoreline is supposed to be red. It's always interesting how these things change, yes.

So basically we've mapped out the erosion and accretion patterns in the Intracoastal waterway. Where you see blue dots here along that black line, which is the Intracoastal Waterway, those are areas that are accreting, or growing.

Everywhere else, where there's a black dot along there it should be red, but where those are red, that shows that the channel is eroding. And these data are very consistent throughout the Georgia Intracoastal Waterway.

And what that's telling us is that both sides of the Intracoastal Waterway are eroding. So first, that tells us that these systems, as opposed to our meandering tidal creeks, are not functioning like normal tidal creeks.

So that makes you want to ask the question why is the Intracoastal Waterway eroding on both sides? So obviously, you know, the big factor is boating activity on the Intracoastal Waterway.

We know from the Corps of Engineers, here's the data for the Savannah district on the top, that tonnage and number of vessels using Intracoastal Waterway has been going down over the last ten years. I don't have data beyond 2010 right now.

But recreational boating, it has been going up. There's two numbers at 2008 in there because Georgia changed how they do their boating registration. But certainly, recreational boating has been increasing over time. There's a lot of heavy usage, and we find higher erosion rates in areas that have higher populations along the coast of Georgia.

So it's pretty clear that recreational boating is a major impact on the Intracoastal Waterway. So if you're looking at loss of marsh from a management standpoint, that is something that you need to consider.

And where that yellow dot is on that figure, there is a marina. And we looked at erosion and accretion patterns above the marina and below the marina, and this is the direction that everybody goes to get out once they put their boat in the water.

You can see those are all black, so those dots should all be red. So basically, the channel below the marina, the direction everybody goes when they put their boat on the water is dominantly eroding.

The channel above the marina where nobody goes is accreting on one side, eroding on the other side like a normal tidal channel system should be. So there is evidence as well that recreational boating is a significant impact on salt marsh systems in the southeast.

And then I just wanted to mention that there is an online portal, the Georgia Coastal Hazards Portal which holds erosion rate data for all the major barrier islands in Georgia. Again, the black dots should be red.

All that data is available. The Georgia Coastal Hazards Portal, anybody can go in it. You can look at erosion rates at specific sites. You can look at general patterns such as here, and there's a lot of other information in there, as well about coastal hazards in Georgia.

And lastly, I wanted to mention that the governor of the South Atlantic Alliance, which we've heard mentioned here already, has been developing tools to help regionally assess coastal vulnerability to storms right now.

But the tool that was developed over the last few years, the last two years with NOAA funding, is something that can be put together and used to assess coastal hazards and vulnerability from other factors as well, if there was an interest from a group such as this for specific hazards to be integrated and looked at.

So basically what it did, we had four pilot sites in each of the study areas, one pilot site from North Carolina, South Carolina, one in Georgia, and well, two split in Florida.

And what we did was develop a tool that combines innundation, shore line change vulnerability, and social vulnerability from the University of South Carolina Social Vulnerability Index data into a single composite map so that you can look at your relative vulnerability to coastal hazards.

And what those hazards are are easily changeable using the tool that we have. So I just wanted to let this group be aware of that and know that this is something that NOAA has put significant funding over the last two years into.

All right, thank you very much. I hope I didn't overdo my time.

CHAIR PERKINS: Thank you. Our apology on the projector, Dr. Clark. We're going to get it swapped out here on the next break. Apparently, we've wore this one out.

MR. MILLER: I'm Chief Michael Miller from Coast Guard Station Charleston. I just wanted to point out a couple of examples from the previous slides. Talking about shoaling, and this is just from my experience. I'm a boat driver, okay.

And I heard the examples of, you know, obviously commercial and recreational traffic going through specifically Sullivan's Island up to McClellanville. And I just wanted to point out something that's pretty important as a response standpoint.

I can speak from experience from a response standpoint where I should never have to worry about what's underneath my boat when I'm responding for a search and rescue, ever. Especially in the Intracoastal Waterway.

And I could give an example specifically responding to a search and rescue case where we had to stop. I had to stop. Now fortunately, I had another boat that was coming from outside the jetties coming in from the ocean side, and I was specifically going up the Intracoastal Waterway.

But I actually had to stop in the middle of the day, in the middle of a search and rescue case because I didn't have enough water. And that's just something I wanted to point out just to give you an example of.

CHAIR PERKINS: Great, thank you. We've got 15 minutes for questions, and Susan, we'll let you go first.

MEMBER SHINGLEDECKER: I'm Susan Shingledecker with Boat U.S., and I just want to thank you all for being here. Sometimes I feel like the recreational boater in the crowd, so it's nice to have a whole panel with that perspective.

Brad, I really appreciated your pointing out all the users of the waterway. I think sometimes people, especially who don't live on the ICW, think that romantic notion of cruising down the ICW for the first time.

But this is a really active, working waterway. And as the gentleman from the Coast Guard pointed out, from a safety perspective, the maintenance both on the Army Corps side and on NOAA's side as far as charting, is really vital.

And when it isn't maintained, as we pointed out in the discussions with maintaining the magenta line, waterway users from a safety perspective, either they'll run aground, or they'll be forced outside of the waterway into the open ocean where, as Larry mentioned, these novice boaters, they're probably better off not going.

And so it is a really, really vital element. And while there is this romanticized version of the ICW, it really is a working waterfront that=s vital to maintain.

I had a couple questions for Larry. And you mentioned the ARGUS system, and I actually think this panel hasn't heard that much about the system in use.

We've discussed crowd sourcing kind of generally, but I would be curious if you could tell us a little bit about how many units your community has out, how long you guys have been using them, and what kind of the response has been to that data?

MR. DORMINY: I wish I had John Hersey here from Survice.com who does develop the ARGUS program. ARGUS is crowd sourced, and it is applied, the equipment for the use is put on private boats so that as vessels pass through a certain area, they will transmit that information back to Survice.com, and then Survice.com provides it to whomever would like to have it. And we're contracted with them.

I cannot answer you specific questions about how many vessels are involved or how many units are there. It's interesting because just yesterday in thinking about what I wanted to say today, I asked John Hersey if he had an ARGUS printout of Umbrella Cut, which is used a lot and discussed a lot on our website, and he said he didn't know that any of the vessels had gone that way. But I'll bet you next week, we will get it.

MR. WARD: John Hersey is actually on line.

MR. DORMINY: I'm sorry?

MR. WARD: John Hersey is actually on line.

MR. DORMINY: Oh, he is?

MR. WARD: Yes.

MR. DORMINY: Hi, John.

CHAIR PERKINS: Yes, can we patch Mr. Hersey in for an answer?

MALE PARTICIPANT: This might not work.

(Off microphone comment)

FEMALE PARTICIPANT: Could somebody speak into the mic and tell me if I'm muted?

CHAIR PERKINS: Testing. Yes, no this is live.

(Off microphone comment)

CHAIR PERKINS: John? John, you're unmuted. Can you hear us? John Hersey?

MR. HERSEY: Yes, can you hear me?

CHAIR PERKINS: Thank you. Yes, we can.

MR. HERSEY: Okay.

CHAIR PERKINS: So the question was can you tell us --

(Simultaneous speaking)

MR. HERSEY: -- the question was about how many units do we have on the active units. And right now we have about ten units. And these are just recreational boaters that are, you know, going from the north from the south to make the trip in one direction, then they make the trip in the other direction.

So pretty much a two transit per boat per year in addition to some that kind of just do some local transits, as well.

CHAIR PERKINS: Great, thank you.

MS. MERSFELDER-LEWIS: Are there any other comments you want to make, John?

CHAIR PERKINS: Okay, great. All right, well we'll continue the questioning.

MR. HERSEY: You know, the only comment, like, I think Brad and Larry both suggested is that I think that the crowd sourcing of the bathymetry data would be a good way to address the magenta line issue. So I presume in the breakout session this afternoon, some of this can be dispelled.

CHAIR PERKINS: Okay, very good. Thank you. Brad, I have to ask the question, and I don't want it to seem like I'm trying to defer everything to other FACAs, but there is a FACA specifically for the marine transportation system. There's an MTS FACA. The question of the lack of funding, you know, for the dredging on M95 on the designated marine transportation highway, have you had an opportunity to put this question in front of the MTS FACA?

MR. PICKEL: I've talked to individuals at MARAD and different organizations, and definitely working hand-in-hand with the Corps. But no, sir, I have not had that opportunity.

As the gentleman said earlier, I would love to, you know, because we do see it's vital highway that mirrors I-95, and we don't have enough capacity to move all of the trucks we have, today on I-95, I tried to get up here. But yes, we would love to do it.

CHAIR PERKINS: Yes. Well maybe we can help facilitate, you know, with that. We've been asked to try and find other FACAs that have common interest in work for, you know, those points of common interest and cooperation. So we'll try to do what we can to help you with that. Yes, Joyce?

MEMBER MILLER: I just, I'm not up to date on the magenta line. And I have personally gone down the ICW, so I know what it is. What is the current status on charts and so forth? I'm not 100 percent up to date.

RDML GLANG: Gerd Glang from Coast Survey. So about a year ago we put out a federal register notice asking for input from users of the AIWW on their views and the usefulness of the magenta line.

As you know, the magenta line, we started putting on our charts back in 1912. And it really hadn't been updated or maintained in 70 years, so it was not useful.

And the other thing is how boaters use the magenta line has really changed, especially in this age of modern electronics. So what was meant to be sort of broad directional guidance, follow this line generally for where the Intracoastal Waterway goes, was being used literally as a navigation track line. And so that was leading to some unfortunate situations.

So we made a decision to remove the magenta line, lacking any information to improve it. And we certainly didn't have the resources, nor do we now have the resources to go resurvey the way it was done in the 1930's.

But we went through a public process, we heard from boaters. And so we as a policy decision decided we would restore the magenta line where we had data to support it and to maintain it.

And that's a considerable effort, and we rely on our navigation managers in the regions, like Kyle, to provide that first hand information. And I don't know if you want to talk about it some more, Kyle. But there are places where we have put the magenta line back based on corroborating information on where we can show it correctly. Kyle, do you want to?

MR. WARD: Yes. And I wanted to highlight too that the Army Corps of Engineers as a caretaker does throughout this region survey the ICW once a year. And we have taken that data into the marine chart division and updated the nautical chart to the extent we are able to at the scale of our product.

And most of the charts along the Intracoastal Waterway are at a 1/40,000 scale which limits our ability to put a lot of detail in there. But a lot of, you know, those surveys from the Army Corps do get submitted to NOAA for the update of that line, and they were used. And as they're being put back on, it's largely their data that we're using to put that in the right spot.

CHAIR PERKINS: Are you accepting data from any other sources, Kyle, besides the Army Corps like we've heard about here in this panel session?

MR. WARD: We are looking into and we have access to data such as ARGUS. There's also another, a group out there called ActiveCaptain where we're looking at those reports.

And when we're seeing significant and really hot topics or hot issue areas that we could make a change on the chart, we are engaging those groups and putting information on the chart to at least have the chart reflect what those reports --

You know, you could put a report at shoaling from anybody calling up the Coast Guard or our office at any time. So we are looking at those crowd-sourced sources for that type of information. But whole scale application of the chart, no.

CAPT BRENNAN: Well, that's not exactly true. I mean, we have taken them on a case by case basis. So we did take some interferometric data from USGS up in Woods Hole for Cape Cod Bay.

And we processed all of Joyce's surveys for the Hawaiian islands through to the chart. And so, you know, as we find them and when we can overlap that with need, we do do that.

RDML GLANG: Yes, we're talking about the magenta line, in taking --

CAPT BRENNAN: Yes, particularly not there on the magenta line. But I'm saying --

RDML GLANG: I think that's what Scott's question was, using outside source data for the purpose of rescheming the magenta line. I think that's the context that Kyle was answering.

CAPT BRENNAN: Certainly.

CHAIR PERKINS: Yes, Ken?

MEMBER BARBOR: Do you have an estimate on how much of the magenta line you've returned? You know, you said you've put it on where you have data available.

RDML GLANG: I can get you an update by tomorrow. But I think our plan was it would take us about three years to scheme it all, if I recall correctly. And we made the decision back in January, February to rescheme it.

CHAIR PERKINS: Yes, go ahead, Frank.

MEMBER KUDRNA: Question is for Dr. Alexander and for NOAA. You had mentioned that for use of your surveys by NOAA, it would have to meet NOAA's data standards. Do your surveys meet NOAA's standards, and have they been used in any revisions by NOAA?

DR. ALEXANDER: They do meet the surveying standards that I understand NOAA uses. And we're right now in the process, at least the way I understand it. We've submitted some data, that St. Mary's River data for evaluation just so that there can be a level of comfort that it's been looked at and it passes that kind of standard.

Download 0.74 Mb.

Share with your friends: